In case it is not clear to the public by reading this article, the ONLY reason class sizes would get larger is IF AND ONLY IF the CTC (teachers union) does not make realistic and significant concessions (i.e. hard pay freezes and benefit concessions) during the upcoming contract negotiation. Since the contract is not under Mr. Thompson's control, he was unable to attach a number to any savings that could be realized by the new contract. Therefore, all of this is really dependent on the CTC contract. That will determine if class sizes get larger & PAs lose their jobs. So, I truly hope with all my heart that the CTC leadership and ALL the CTC members realize what is at stake. The previous contracts have been unaffordable and put us on this path of deficit spending. We need to rectify that and this upcoming contract will determine what happens in our district. Putting myself in the shoes of a teacher: 1) I'd be glad to have a job given there are 75,000 unemployed teachers in Illinois and given how many of our neighbors are unemployed or have taken pay cuts and 2) I certainly would be willing to forgo any type of increase and make concessions in my benefits in order to keep the PAs and keep my class from getting any larger. Why make my day-to-day life more difficult and have it on my conscience that people lost their jobs due to my unwillingness to give in? I'd certainly rather walk into school next August seeing the PAs still there and seeing classes the same size.

And please visit www.d15citizens.org for the numbers on what the average salary increases have been for our District 15 career teachers. Thanks.

Thanks Vicki for the additional info and comments. The needs of our children (and those of other teachers) are in the hands of our teachers! Let's hope they do the right thing! As a fb friend of mine stated "people who are wrapped up only in themselves are very small packages ".

Asking for a raise would be unconscionable.

The schools are assets like any other thing around your house. Future investors will be looking to the quality of our district and deciding if Palatine is an area in which they want to belong. If they decide to go else where, your property values will continue to drop and your property taxes will continue to rise. It is as simple as that. Let's invest for the future and our kids. Maybe the district needs a little money to work with and they can trim some of the fat...maybe we can make this a win, win situation for Palatine. Let's think of a bond as an investment in our community. The park district passes bonds all the time without you even knowing it!!! Come on people, stop thinking of today and look toward the next 5 years and let's give the board opportunities to present a case back to the community for our future. Otherwise, you may be living in your current house for a long, long time!

"HI, I live in Palatine with 35 kids in our classes...and why don't you want to move here?"

Scott, please read my comment above. There is another solution. We don't have to increase class sizes nor do w need to raise the debt in our community. (Remember the 2010 bond vote - it failed on a 2:1 margin.) If we keep increasing our debt and our taxes, nobody is going to want to move here either and many of the current residents will be unable to afford their property taxes. "Hi, our community refuses to live within its means, do you want to buy my house?"

Increasing debt and increasing class sizes are NOT the only choices. There is a third choice. We can live within our means. This means having our expenses not exceed our revenue. Then people will want to move into our community, the current folks can keep living here, and kids will be the priority of our schools.

Why do we need $28 million in reserves?

G - the answer to your question is simply this: the reserves are a "snapshot" balance of cash on hand at June 30 each year. Because D15 receives its tax revenues only twice a year, it needs to have cash in reserve to pay bills and payroll until the next tax receipt comes in. That is usually November, but could be December if Springfield is late in releasing funds. It's not a stashing away of surplus funds, because right now D15 is still spending more than it collects. That deficit is clearly disclosed in the Board's financial statements. Hope that helps.

Vicki-- While I absolutely agree that D15 cannot have their operating expenses out-pace their revenues...... I find it comical that you say that all these teachers need to "do the right thing". I think what you are trying to say is that they should all do what you consider to be the "right thing". I'm certain that the teachers will be taking into account the defecit, and all the other financial factors when contract negotiations take place.

Upton, I don't see what you find comical. I am not trying to be funny in any way. This is a very serious situation - nothing comical about it.

It is very disheartening to see the full responsibility for the budget crisis solution put upon the CTC. Again, very manipulative of the district leadership. This played out exactly as planned. Back the CTC into a corner.

Look at what this teacher union did:
http://lemont.patch.com/articles/district-113a-teachers-agree-to-2-year-salary-freeze
How awesome are they!

Here is another one!
http://www.oakpark.com/News/Articles/01-26-2011/Oak_Park_teachers_union_accepts_one-year_pay_freeze

Bucephalus- In your defense of the CTC... You said we haven't heard from the teacher's union regarding their thoughts on solving this financial crisis. However, are you forgetting their most recent evaluation and response to this? Last we all heard from them they refused to look into opening the existing contract early to get a start on addressing this spiraling debt.

Previous to that they were hurriedly working very quietly to pass unrealistic wage increases without any public discussion last contract period.

And you wonder why the public has tired of giving them credibility?

Jenny, they did talk with the board in last year, Thompson confirmed that at the January budget meeting. I have no idea what they discussed, he didn't let that information out so unless you know that information we are just speculating. What did the board demand? What did CTC propose? We don't know. I think it's again symptomatic of this whole discussion that you immediately assume that CTC contemptuously ignored the poor hapless board's request to reopen the contract. Maybe that is what happened. Maybe the board demanded a cut of 200 teschers, we have no idea.

As for last time, negotiations, as was also pointed out cannot involve the public, that is an unfair labor practice. You can castigate the union for not getting public opinion but they are not responsible to the public. The public's voice is the school board.

We know the contract did not get re-opened. You can speculate about what the Board may have "demanded" - cutting 200 teachers? Are you kidding me? Do you know who the Board members are? Have you gone to BOE meetings? Have you spoken to them? I suggest you do before we get further into this process. By the same token, I would appreciate the opportunity to speak with CTC leadership but they do not make themselves available to the public.

But I know this: Palatine teachers approve strike in landslide vote
September 19, 2006 | By John Keilman, Tribune staff reporter
.
Teachers in Palatine-based Community Consolidated School District 15 voted verwhelmingly Monday night to authorize a strike. By a 772-5 vote, teachers and certified staff members of the Classroom Teachers Council supported the measure.

"We hope the next step is a contract and not a strike, but we do think this sends a pretty clear message that the district needs to engage in the bargaining process with us," said Lisa Nuss, the council's executive director and chief negotiator.

Let them strike. There are plenty of teachers currently working at Starbucks the district can hire. Have the teachers look at their neighbors who have been taking pay cuts over the past few years just to keep their jobs. There are no "lane' or "step" raises in the private sector. There also aren't any guaranteed lifetime jobs in the private sector. If we want to treat the district as an asset, we should look at it like one. Where's our return on our investment?

Bucephalus,
After reading these comments, obviously you and Vicki have your own axes to grind - but doesn't this just come down to simple math? Costs are rising significantly faster than revenues - and labor represents 82% of those costs - therefore, those costs have to be cut. It really isn't more difficult than that. If revenue suddenly rises by large %'s, then costs can increase by similar %'s.

No ax to grind whatsoever. I am passionate about our school district and our community and I want to live in a world where common sense rules.

I also want to live in a world where common sense rules! But I'm also realistic to know that is not very likely! I agree with everything that Mike posted above. Revenues and costs have to be fairy even over the years. If not financial issues are sure to cripple D15. I'm certain the CTC understands the concept as well. Just as Mike posted above, just because the teachers recieve step raises it should not be held against them. There is no doubt that they have better job security than many in the private sector during a poor economy. On the flip side teachers income will not jump during a good eceonomy, as will many in the private sector. The economy has been poor for long enough for some to build resentment as a result. It is what it is. Having someone demand the teachers "do the right thing" on a comment thread when discussing others pay salary and benefits is going to far in my view. At the end of the day I'm sure everything will be settled in a way that will satisfy the D15 board. Once again, we have all elected the board to negotiate on the tax payers behalf.

"Once again, we have all elected the board to negotiate on the tax payers behalf."

It took a few years but we finally did get a board that represents the taxpayers (rather than having the union on both sides of the bargaining table).

There are plenty of jobs in the private sector whose income does not "jump" in a good economy. Plenty, including those of private sector teachers. The data we have at www.d15citizens.org shows a 10-year history of the career teachers in D15, plenty long enough to draw some conclusions. Plenty of folks in the private sector do not see a jump in income when the economy improves.

@ Scott -- I must confess that I have little knowledge about D15 board dealings prior to starting to pay attention since 2010 or so. So I will take your word that your above post is accurate. So I guess what comes around goes around right? It is what it is.

Upton - before this board was elected the board majorities were basically union-friendly members (often from the educational sector) that gave away large increases even though there was no way to pay for them. That's part of the reason the back door referendum was defeated.

Thanks Scott! Once again, what comes around goes around. @Vickie-- I agree that plenty of folks in the private sector do not see a jump in income when the economy improves. I would think you agree that plenty of folks that work in the private sector do see a jump in income when the economy improves. Its simple macro-economics. As for private sector teachers, I will start to give a hoot if and when my children start to attend a private school. Until then it is comparing apples and oranges.

How can comparing public sector teachers to private sector teachers be comparing apples to oranges? Same qualifications needed, same job responsibilities, same time commitment. But much different pay scale.

And, I would not agree that many see their incomes jump in the private sector when the economy improves. I would say many, the majority, do not.

This is in response to Mr. Scott Miller's suggestion of the district "issuing bonds as an investment in the future", which I can only assume would be to temporarily fill the gap between what the existing revenue growth allows and the continued spending, mostly for wages and benefits, that exceed that revenue. The issuance of debt is really only appropriate for the occasional large expenses of infrastructure projects, certainly not for funding operational expenses. I would like to see anyone try to justify otherwise. If the true intent is to maintain a level of salary and benefits that exceed our current revenue then the appropriate avenue is to seek a referendum to allow the District to exceed the limits of the tax cap (PTEL). Mr. Miller or others are free to petition for such a referendum, but to suggest we fund our spending excess with more debt is just financial irresponsibility.

I would venture to say that if there was *Capital* fund referendum and the use of the money was clearly spelled out (and the money could not be shifted around after the fact) that some, perhaps even most, of the people in the district could support that.

Since the last referendum was for 'working cash' (aka, operational fund) we'll never know what the result would have been if it had been designated only for capital projects instead.

Scott: Point well taken. The District's own information clearly shows the fund balance being consumed year-after-year over the past decade to fund their deficit spending. In my opinion, the intent of a referendum for "working cash" is to ESTABLISH such a fund, not to replenish an existing fund to allow for continued deficit spending. Again, this would be financial irresponsibility.

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110609/news/706099917/

"Both parties acknowledge that each made genuine and meaningful proposals,” it stated. “However, the parties were unable to reach an agreement at this time.”

Looks like both parties tried but just couldn't close the deal. I think this speaks volumes of the willingness of both parties to at least listen to each other.

Lamplighters,
I dont really think it says much of anything. Both sides HAVE to say exactly what they said. Doesn't mean much at all. Actually agreeing to open negotiations would mean something. Anything else is likely lip service.

Exactly Mike. Exactly.

It sounds like they did open up negotiations, but for what ever reason they could not come to terms with a change. To me that doesn't sound like both sides were stubborn but tried to come to a solution to the problem at the end of last year. I am wondering what the hang up was? Mike when you say open negotiations do you mean in the public?

http://triblocal.com/palatine/2012/02/09/district-15-board-supportive-of-new-list-of-cuts/

Lisa Nuss, president of the District 15 teacher’s union, said she was skeptical about the projected deficit and the public way it has been discussed, calling it a “negotiating tactic.”

Here we go. Remember 2006.

"and the public way it has been discussed"

I guess discussing these things in the light of day don't sit well with Lisa Nuss.

Of course this is all politcal theater. I have a child in band and orchestra and it was strange how a petition and some people speaking at the meeting made that issue go away. Don't get me wrong, I am happy they are not proposing to cut it, but it made me wonder why the BOE stance on it shifted very quickly. It seemed like they were trying to stir up a hornet's nest of parents and teachers to get upset over the cuts. I wonder if they get another petition to save the next item on thier ax list will they react the same? Only time will tell. The community can only hope level heads will prevail here on both sides.

I am curious what makes Lisa Nuss so skeptical? Does she have any numbers to back up her view points? Why doesn't she share them?

Lamplighter - remember that the original list was just a list of *possible* areas to be cut; I don't think (at that time) one area was favored over any other.

But I think it was easy to remove dropping band from the list in that it was only 4% of the money to be saved anyways.

I agree with you about Lisa Nuss. If she thinks the districts numbers are wrong she needs to point out where. Talk is cheap; let's see some real data from her.

It wasn't a "possible" list. It was the recommended list for cuts. It's strange that the total of all the "possible" cuts just magically happened to total the projected deficit. How convenient that taking that list in its entirety would solve the deficit. If it was an honest "possible" list there would have been other options totaling well more than the deficit to allow the community to voice their opinions for what to cut and save.

So you're sort of right Scott, no area was favored more than any other. The entire list was preferred.

Of course it was a "possible" list. Nothing is set in stone until the Board votes on it. The Superintendent reports to the Board, not the other way around. The Board can do what they wish with the plan Thompson presented. The reason the list "magically" happened to total the projected deficit is because that is what the Board TOLD Thompson to do - to come up with a list that equalled the projected deficit amount. He was unable to attach a number to any savings that could be realized from the CTC contract since that is out of his control. You really should start coming to the Board meetings Bucephalus!

The Board can tell him to go back and give them more options. You are just nitpicking words - "possible" or "recommended" - it does not matter what they are called. But there just is not a whole lot to pick from since he only has 18% of the budget with which to work. So, there aren't many "possibilities" to choose from!

The Daily Herald put out an article a week ago about a 10 million dollar budget deficit problem with Indian Prairie School District 204 in Naperville They, too, are going through a contract negotiation with the lteachers union this year. The circumstances are very similar to District 15's situation. Howe
ver, District 204 has had much less drama in the media about it because it has been handled much differently than District 15. It appears that D15 has chosen to stir up a hornets nest for a purpose. No such media war exists in the neighboring district because they are not seeking politics over people and straight forward business. Why is D15 seeking such drama? What is their true, underlying purpose for these actions? D15'S methods in creating a frenzy are very unhealthy and unnecessary for all involved. They need to start showing some leadership and take control of the situation. D 15 is looking very foolish right now.

No is denying that you have a clearly defined process. It's just not a healthy process. It has generated a great deal of division and anxiety that didn't need do be there. True leadersship knows the difference.

Margaret - how is the process different in D204?

Past news for D204 (which may repeat itself this year); we're trying to avoid going down this path:

http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/03/145-teachers-hit-with-pink-slips-in-prairie-district-204.html

"Calling it "sobering" and "depressing," officials in Indian Prairie School District 204 decided this week to lay off 145 teachers and increase budget cuts to a total of $21.4 million for the 2010-11 school year.

Board members on Monday approved $12.2 million in cuts, which come on top of $9.2 million in cuts approved in December

Officials said the reduction of the teachers, representing 6.7 percent of the staff, won't appreciably increase class sizes. Fifty-five elementary school teachers will be fired. The maximum class size will increase from 29 to 31 in second through fifth grades. Class sizes will stay the same in kindergarten and first grade.

At the middle school level, 30 teachers will be let go, while another 35 teachers will be removed at the high school level. Maximum class sizes at those two levels will increase by two students, which in some high school classes could mean as many as 35 to 37 students, officials said. Special education and preschool programs will lose 25 positions."

The entire economy is sobering and depressing. Every facet of business is currently faced with tough decisions. People expect that to be the case. However, dragging it out with over exposure in the media and too much information is just as damaging to people as no information at all.

While I cannot speak for Indian Prairie School District 204 in Naperville, I do appreciate District 15 taking the effort to involve the public in the issue early. I would not have wanted the school board to simply make the decisions in a vacuum. Yes, there has been a lot of commotion, such as the band director's petition drive to save band and orchestra from one of the potential cuts. But in my mind there was good that came from it, and had it been decided without warning during an empty school board meeting it would have had a far different outcome. I think it is better to be open and upfront, the earlier the better, so that the public can better participate. Just my thought.

Margaret - what has been the 'over exposure' and 'too much information'? The five year spreadsheets? The list of possible cuts? The public meetings?

It has all been a bit too much when you put it all together. There is no way to make everyone happy with any decision which is made. I really dislike the public image we have now established because all of this. Palatine looks like a train wreck. Just ask around.

A train wreck with REALLY HIGH TAXES!

I too applaud the open meetings that they have had, but I am confused about the rush now to cut millions when there is so much in reserves. I don't want my child's education diminished because of these cuts. I remember that last year the patch reported on the district deficit spending millions of dollars then in October they reported that they found $4 or 5 million. That is a huge. What happens if we cut services to our kids and we find another X million next fall? I would rather tap into some of the reserves. I know the board wants to keep a reserve of x% (I think it is 25%) so as long as the reserves are above that can't you still keep funding the things you propose to cut?

Lamplighter1980 - The money in the fund balances, the largest being the Education Fund, are not "reserves". The amount you see are the dollars on a specific date, the end of the fiscal year June 30th. From that point the fund deminishes as the bills are paid until anonter infusion of cash arrives in November or December when the county collects the property tax. The fund balances are identical to that of your checking account. It peaks on payday and then retreats as you pay your bills. If you go veiw the video at the February 8th Board meeting, Mike Adamczyk delivers an excellent description of how the system functions. In fact two years ago because Cook County was late in transfering funds to all districts, the funds got low enought D15 was preparing to borrow money using Tax Anticipation Warrants so that they could continue operations.

Here the link to the Board meeting video:http://www.ccsd15.net/pages/CCSD15/Board_of_Education_Group

Thunderchief68, you are 100% correct. To put it into dollar terms, at the start of the current budget on July 1 the fund balance was about $55 million. Now, consider that the total property tax levy is about $110 million for which roughly half comes in the Spring and the other half in the Fall. So, in essence, our reserves only cover the District for 6 months. As it is right now District 15 is praying that Cook County is not late collecting property taxes, and/or the State is late in paying its bills, both of which are all too common. To think of this money as "available" to plug a budget gap is, frankly, utterly insane. I trust that Lamplighter simply didn't understand the purpose of a fund balance.

I see the issue with the state being late on their payment as a major concern. Thanks for clarifying.

Great discussion on a gravely serious issue facing our community. Our state gov't could add to our community's fiscal challenges.

Illinois Schools May Chip In on Teachers’ Retirement:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/education/illinois-schools-may-pay-part-of-teachers-retirement.html?_r=2